Section 230b (b) /, &, Q6060 and 9 QQ Qatil Adham, Defendant of Defamation of Evil and Evidence in the House Overnight The defendants did not identify the accused on the spot in their supplementary statement and He relied on the statement of his real brother, the other eyewitness, that could not be relied upon against the accused. Witnesses present at the scene of the incident and eyewitnesses and conspiracies were witnesses of the incident and witnesses based on testimony, who did not disclose and did not testify about the deceased or any public authority. ? Wajitkar's credible evidence was highly unlikely and the prosecution did not benefit from the extraordinary testimony that the prosecution dismissed on charges of extra-judicial confession after recording their inspection as Chief of Record. They were given no opportunity to examine them and the trial court's reliance on their testimony was not legal. The benefit of every doubt in the story of the prosecution is not a matter of grace, but of the facts as a matter of fact. The benefit of the doubt was acquitted
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
